REPRODUCIBILITY OF THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROXIMAL HUMERAL OSSIFICATION IN IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS
ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the intra- and interobserver reproducibility of the classification of proximal humeral ossification in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Methods Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. Radiographs (anteroposterior) of 29 patients diagnosed with idiopathic...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Dataset |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the intra- and interobserver reproducibility of the classification of proximal humeral ossification in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Methods Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. Radiographs (anteroposterior) of 29 patients diagnosed with idiopathic scoliosis were chosen and investigated at the Spine Surgery Outpatient Clinic of the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology of the Hospital Getúlio Vargas, Recife, Pernambuco. These radiographs were evaluated and classified by 9 spinal orthopedic surgeons at two moments, with a minimum interval of 30 days, for analysis of the intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of the classification of proximal humeral ossification used as a predictor of peak growth velocity. Results Intraobserver reproducibility achieved moderate to substantial concordance with the kappa index. In the analysis of interobserver reproducibility using the Fleiss’ kappa method, a reasonable to moderate concordance was observed, except for in stage 5, in which concordance ranged from substantial to almost perfect. Conclusion In this study, the reproducibility of the Li classification in most of the stages was reasonable to moderate for the interobserver assessment and moderate to substantial for the intraobserver assessment, which differs from the current literature. Level of evidence III; Diagnostic studies – Investigation of a diagnostic test. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.6084/m9.figshare.19906293 |